Re: APOSTASIA in 2 Thess 2:3
Paul S. Dixon (dixonps@juno.com)
Mon, 21 Jul 1997 15:11:58 EDT
On Sun, 13 Jul 1997 15:34:54 -0400 (EDT) CEP7@aol.com writes:
>
>In a message dated 7/12/1997 10:37:55 PM, dixonps@juno.com
>(Paul S. Dixon) wrote in response to the taking of APOSTASIA as
>a physical departure, that is, as the rapture itself:
>
><<The problems with this are two too many. First, it has Paul then
>double talking. He would then be saying something like this: now
>concerning the coming of the Lord and our gathering together unto
>Him (2 Thess 2:1) (a clear reference to the rapture) ... that day wil
> not come except the APOSTASIA come first (PRWTON). Huh?
>
>Paul,
>
>One minor question. Does Rapture necessarily equal Day of the Lord. PT
>theology distinguishes the two. If they are not equal then your first
>point is not problematic. Personally, I think APOSTASIA is contextually
>defined in vv. 10-12.
No, in the school of thought to which you refer the rapture does not
equal the day of the Lord, but it does start the day. Thus, it is
included in it. If so, and if the day of the Lord will not come until
the APOSTASIA come PRWTON and APOKALUFQH hO ANQRWPOS THS ANOMIAS, then
neither will the rapture occur until some time later.
Paul Dixon